Anthropogenic emission is the main contributor to the rise of atmospheric methane during 1993–2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Atmospheric methane (CH4) concentrations have shown a puzzling resumption in growth since 2007 following a period of stabilization from 2000 to 2006. Multiple hypotheses have been proposed to explain the temporal variations in CH4 growth, and attribute the rise of atmospheric CH4 either to increases in emissions from fossil fuel activities, agriculture and natural wetlands, or to a decrease in the atmospheric chemical sink. Here, we use a comprehensive ensemble of CH4 source estimates and isotopic δ13C-CH4 source signature data to show that the resumption of CH4 growth is most likely due to increased anthropogenic emissions. Our emission scenarios that have the fewest biases with respect to isotopic composition suggest that the agriculture, landfill and waste sectors were responsible for 53 ± 13% of the renewed growth over the period 2007–2017 compared to 2000–2006; industrial fossil fuel sources explained an additional 34 ± 24%, and wetland sources contributed the least at 13 ± 9%. The hypothesis that a large increase in emissions from natural wetlands drove the decrease in atmospheric δ13C-CH4 values cannot be reconciled with current process-based wetland CH4 models. This finding suggests the need for increased wetland measurements to better understand the contemporary and future role of wetlands in the rise of atmospheric methane and climate feedback. Our findings highlight the predominant role of anthropogenic activities in driving the growth of atmospheric CH4 concentrations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".